Computerized systems have made a significant contribution towards the advancement of modern society and are utilized in a number of applications to achieve advantageous results. The field of education is one such example that has benefited from the utilization of computerized systems.
In particular, the emergence of the Internet, a network of distributed computers and computerized devices, has made a significant contribution towards the advancement of education. The unprecedented speed, versatility and capacity available through which information can be communicated and disseminated over the Internet have revolutionized numerous traditional practices of education, most notably research and the distribution of learning material.
Another example of an educational practice that has benefited from the utilization of computerized systems is the practice of traditional memorization techniques. Conventional education techniques—particularly at earlier stages of development—often focus on the retention and recitation of memorized information. Common education techniques involve introducing a concept or a sample of data to a student, who is instructed to assimilate and distill the material, before being asked to apply the concept or recite the material (classically during an “examination”).
Effective tools have been developed to assist students in memorizing material. One of the most primitive tools (still in frequent use today) is the use of “flash cards,” usually implemented as a unit of double sided material (usually some composition of paper or other wood-based fibers) upon which a discrete reference (typically a question) related to the material to be memorized is visually incorporated on one side of the material and an appropriate response (e.g., an answer) to the reference is visually incorporated on the other side of the material. Visual incorporation typically comprises a textual description, but may include static graphic references (e.g., pictures). The displacement of the question from the answer being so that at any time, only one of the reference and the response is ever intended to be visible.
Accordingly, conventional application of flash cards to a memorizing program includes self-selective “quizzing” of the material by the user, wherein an assessor (on occasion the user himself) assesses the memory of the user regarding the material referenced by the flash card by displaying the reference to the user, soliciting a response from the user to the question, and verifying the accuracy of the user-submitted response with the “correct” response displayed on the reverse side of the flash card. A common practice is to repeat displaying the units of material (e.g., the individual flash cards) to the user. To vary the difficulty of the memorization program, subsequent displays of the flash cards may be presented in varying sequences.
Contemporary implementations of flash cards and similar memory assessment tools using more recent technology typically include displaying the “flash card” in an electronic display, wherein the display may present a single flash card with the user-selectable option to view the information on the “reverse” side of the flash card. Advantages afforded by these advancements include providing a practically limitless amount of material for each flash card. Wherein traditional flash cards may be limited by the size of the card, a computerized implementation of a flash card may not be limited as such.
Other advantages include the possibility of using non-visual references. For example, the reference to the material may comprise an audio clip or track. Visual references are also no longer limited to textual description and static graphic references. For instance, short animations or motion pictures alone, or in combination with other media types may be used as references. Finally, removing the possible clutter attributed to a plurality of traditional flash cards is another advantage offered by computerized implementations.
Unfortunately, computerized flash card and memory assessment systems frequently do not include a mechanism for optimizing the delivery of the content based on the users current knowledge of the topic being studied or quizzed. Typical flash card and memory assessment systems will display the discrete units of material (the individual cards) in some pre-determined order. Most systems offer a feature to randomize the order. However, these systems do not typically provide features for optimizing the order to allow for a more efficient memorization process.
Traditional (e.g., paper) flash card implementations allow a user to incorporate self-assessment of progress techniques to make a memorization process more efficient. For example, users who have a high ratio of successfully identifying the correct response to a reference on a flash card may find it more efficient to spend more time on other flash cards. Accordingly, traditional flash card users are able to manipulate the sequence of flash cards to adjust the frequency any particular card is displayed. However, this feature is often translated poorly or not at all among computerized flash card systems. For example, current available flash card systems may allow a user to remove a flash card from a sequence entirely, or to adjust the frequency according to a set period of time (e.g., “don't show this card again for one week”). However, these implementations are rigid and rely on the user's own approximation for when the flash card should be viewed next.
Another concern is when a flash card user has material from more than one unrelated subjects to memorize, each with different memorization deadlines (e.g., examinations). A user may prioritize material from a more imminent subject. Allotting time to memorize the subjects equally runs the risk of incomplete memorization for one or both subjects. On the other hand, spending time only on the material of one subject may leave insufficient time for the process of memorizing the other subject to complete. Computerized flash card and memory assessment systems do not provide features analogous to such techniques. As such, these systems may suffer from inefficiency and inefficacy.